"Odd" Signs Within Trigons

[By Jove]

Have you ever noticed that in triplicities that there is one sign that is different from the other two? Wonder if they mean anything significant like the "odd" signs being different from the other signs in the trigon.

Arlesa "Fire" Trigon
Sagittarius differs by having lacking the Sun as a dignified planet while Aries and Leo both have the Sun dignified. The Sun is the classic diurnal ruler of the Arlesa Trigon. Jupiter is the nocturnal ruler. Sagittarius is the only chimera in the trigon.

Tavica "Earth" Trigon
Taurus is the only sign in the trigon to have dignified planets that are the diurnal and nocturnal rulers of the trigon (Venus and Moon). Virgo is ruled by Mercury. Capricorn by Saturn and Mars. Taurus is also the only "pure" animal. Capricorn is a chimera. Virgo is human.

Geliaq "Air" Trigon
Libra differs by having a benefic ruling planet (Venus). Neither Gemini nor Aquarius are ruled by a benefic. Gemini and Aquarius are human characters while Libra is an inanimate object.

Cascopi "Water" Trigon
Only Scorpio is ruled by a malefic planet that is also the diurnal and nocturnal ruler of the trigon (Mars). Also, Cancer and Pisces clearly allude to the ocean and water life. Scorpio is the opposite, alluding to the desert and venomous land animals.

[By Jove]

Any thoughts from the experts out here? Jim? Jupiter? Danica? Veronica?

[Jim Eshelman]

Your question was, "Have you ever noticed," and, sure, my mind has wandered those sidewalks one time or another (or similar sidewalks, maybe not exactly the same distinctions you picked). I'd particularly noticed that when I thought I'd identified a concrete trait in a Triplicity, there often would be one sign that didn't fit it quite so squarely or seemed "one off."


I don't worry about it too much because Triplicities are the weakest characteristics of signs. Commonalities of signs trine each other are much milder relationships than Quadruplicities (signs opposite and square each other) in about the same way that trine aspects between planets are milder relationships than oppositions and squares between planets.

In fact (just to run with this for a minute), all parts of space may be in aspect-like relationship to all other parts of space. To state the obvious, a sign is more like itself than it is like any other sign, i.e., the conjunction is the strongest relationship a sign has; but the opposite sign is easily the second strongest relationship a sign has. (Opposite signs co-define each other, share different ends of the same issues, sometimes share identical traits but for different reasons). And both of those opposing signs have the next strongest commonality (almost as strong a similarity) with the two signs that square them.

After all of this, the next strongest commonality a sign has is with those that trine it; but, as when moving from a hard aspect to a soft aspect between planets, there is a big "drop-off" in how important that relationship is. Signs trine each other have a significantly lesser commonality than signs opposite or square each other.

It's easy, then, to let the imagination start running away with me on all sorts of questions that spin out of this. For example, if this really is like aspect relationships, does this describe the difference between polarities and quadruplicities on one hand and triplicities on the other? Do quadruplicities show commonalities on how signs express movement, force, energy, and change (that does fit the Hub-Spoke-Rim model pretty well) while triplicities reflect placid states of commonality? Or is that word play?

Anyway, sorry, I ran far from your original question after giving my answer to it.

[Jupiter Sets at Dawn]

Yeah, I noticed something like that with triplicities, but that was long ago before I knew anything about Sidereal Astrology. I don't use triplicities in general, and the relationships between the signs aren't really important (or noticable) to me in general. I've moved away from the idea the mythology and symbolism hold any real importance. Most of it is just mnemonics, and doesn't deserve deep study. You can use Sidereal Astrology, and use it well, without ever having heard of triplicities.

I wouldn't look at triplicities alone. I suggest you look at the quadruplicities as the main framework and the triplicities as secondary.
Actually, I suggest you look at both as superfluous and just look at aspects between planets instead.

[Veronica]

Any thoughts from the experts out here? Jim? Jupiter? Danica? Veronica?

I dont ever really notice those things until Im way deep into a chart and see a relationship that wasnt inheritly noticed.
Meaning
I admit to forgetting fixed cardinal and mutable signs. I never seemed to be able to add much to an interpretation by thinking about that.

I think the nature of a threesome relationship does dictate that one of the three plays a different role.

[Jim Eshelman]

I admit to forgetting fixed cardinal and mutable signs. I never seemed to be able to add much to an interpretation by thinking about that.

I tend to think of it on a "first pass" gathering my thoughts as a basic way of synthesizing the Sun and Moon signs. When Sun and Moon are in the same quadruplicity, then that's a big deal, e.g., as Aquarius-Scorpio you're a double Hub, Jove is a double Spoke, etc. When they aren't the same, I tend to think of the one missing, e.g., as a Virgo-Aquarius I don't have a Rim luminary.

[Veronica]

I admit to forgetting fixed cardinal and mutable signs. I never seemed to be able to add much to an interpretation by thinking about that.

I tend to think of it on a "first pass" gathering my thoughts as a basic way of synthesizing the Sun and Moon signs. When Sun and Moon are in the same quadruplicity, then that's a big deal, e.g., as Aquarius-Scorpio you're a double Hub, Jove is a double Spoke, etc. When they aren't the same, I tend to think of the one missing, e.g., as a Virgo-Aquarius I don't have a Rim luminary.

Hmmm.
Its only in the past year that I grasped the meaning of rim, hub and spoke signs. It did deeply resonate with me when I looked at the charts of people. It allowed me to see deeper into the whole mechanism of not just my own personal chart, but how the relationships I have been given (ie my siblings) and the ones I select to build (ie friends and coworkers) balance, compliment and work off of each other as a whole.
I do tend to look at the spread sheet to asses if a person has an outstanding collection of planets in one cell (ie fixed water) and see also what areas are lacking as I suspect that area may be where an individual would need or benefit from a relationship with another who does have those qualities.

But I admit that if you gave me a pop quiz on the signs and said is gemini fix mutable or cardinal.....I would struggle bc I think I just over think it and I dont sence how to get out of feeling its semi arbitrary.
Its like I understand that these quailties are the main tendencies of the currents but deep inside I feel that its not pure. Sometimes water is like fire and sometimes rims are like hubs and it depends on the events and circumstances that determine the quailty.
Which is why I dont spend to much time dwelling on it because....Ill just overthink it and not let my gut settle on my first impressions.

[Jupiter Sets at Dawn]

But I admit that if you gave me a pop quiz on the signs and said is gemini fix mutable or cardinal.....I would struggle bc I think I just over think it and I dont sence how to get out of feeling its semi arbitrary.

It is semi-arbitrary. Somebody drew a grid and filled it in not based on which sign has which quality, but on which sign comes next.
Look at this:
x | x | x| x
x | x | x| x
x | x | x| x
There's your grid, now fill it in with Aries at the upper left, one column over and one row down, Taurus, one column over and one down, Gemini, one over... can't go down so go up to the top, Cancer...
| x | x|
x | | x| x
x | x | | x
Then over one.. off the grid, so back to the far left, down one, Leo, over one down one, Virgo, back to the top of the grid and over one, Libra...
| x | |
| | x| x
x | | | x
and so on.

Comes out like this:
| | |
| | |
| | |
Now look.. every row is a quadruplicity, and every column is a triplicity. Plus, every column shows the trines, and every row shows the opposition and squares (duh). If you pick a sign and then go to the column with it's opposition (the second column either right or left,) the other two signs in that column are the sextiles for that sign.

In other words, Scorpio is opposite Taurus, and square both Leo and Aquarius, while trine Cancer and Pisces, and sextile Capricorn and Virgo.
Don't try to think it out. Draw the grid, then pick a sign and look at the rows and columns.

Yeah, I got your schematism right here. While I'm sure other people use something similar, this is the one I built when I first started studying astrology. There's no meaning in it, just convenience.

[Veronica]

Wow
That makes things so much simpler for me to grasp!
Thanks for taking the time to explain it like that.
Im ready for that pop quiz now!

[By Jove]

(Opposite signs co-define each other, share different ends of the same issues, sometimes share identical traits but for different reasons). And both of those opposing signs have the next strongest commonality (almost as strong a similarity) with the two signs that square them.

That makes more sense than triplicities. I even think signs that have the same ruling planets have more in common than signs of the same "element".

IMO Sag has more in common with Cancer and Pisces than Aries and Leo.
Scorpio has more in common with Aries, Capricorn, and Aquarius (Uranus) than Cancer and Pisces.
Capricorn has more in common with Aries, Libra, and Scorpio than Taurus and Virgo.
And so on.

If I had to define the same "issues" or traits the signs share with each other, it would be something like this, I guess. What do you think?

Aries-Libra: social structure, law, familial duty. Aries is very much an atomized individual while Libra has much to do with "the other". Aries rises to positions of power to climb the social ladder. Libra embodies marriage and the reciprocations and responsibilities that come in committed partnerships.

Taurus-Scorpio: Liebestod, sexuality, creation and destruction. Taurus is about the cycles of nature, generation, and "pure sex", the human body without any cosmetics or social trappings. Scorpio is about expressing conflict and power for the sake of them, as well as iconoclasm as an essential function.

Gemini-Sagittarius: culture, philosophy, the intellect, belief. Gemini is very much a skeptic and intellectual as well as a versatile tradesman of man arts, often a doubting Thomas towards religious conventions. Sagittarius embodies higher culture, education, and religious practices, and very much expresses the "cliquishness" of elite organizations, since they only allow the "best and brightest".

Cancer-Capricorn: commerce, money, acquisition of wealth, social sects. Cancer has been associated with trade since antiquity, is a politician of many faces, and often grasping. Capricorn tends to be reserved in character and not "show their hand". Cancer is an ardent patriot while Capricorn is a rebel.

Leo-Aquarius: the individual and society, personal power, sovereignty. Leo is the king, the VIP, the distinguished individual that stands out from the masses. Aquarius represents the masses themselves and common humanity.

Virgo-Pisces: reason and emotion, service of others. Virgo embodies the pursuit of reason and commitment to rationality for its own sake. Pisces embodies fantasy, the imagination, and storytelling. Virgo is, well, a virgin and so tends to remain single, while Pisces is fecund and has many children.

[Jim Eshelman]

I wrote an article in Constellations magazine in the late '70s covering half the polarities. I was never fully satisfied with it, and never wrote part 2 for the other half. Though several key themes become obvious as one is working and going chart to chart, getting an exhaustive and balanced statement about all six polarities is difficult.

I did notice, though, that the three-word summaries of Sun-signs I created a year ago lend themselves naturally to thinking in polarities. Here they are for review, and then I will add a few remarks about the polarities.

TAURUS Charming. Devoted. Erotic.
SCORPIO Freedom. Combative. Sexual.

Erotic-Sexual provides both a commonality and a distinction. The other two pairs express the polarity between charm and combativeness (congeniality vs. conflict) and something I haven't quite articulated optimally that expresses the polarity between Devotion and Freedom - not that either is unfree or lacks devotion (and "permanence" is not to be jumped on as a Taurus word), but one end of the polarity furthering sticking to connection and the other demanding freedom as its greater priority. Perhaps these can be used to isolate more generic (archetypal? at least stereotypal?) polarity symbolism.

GEMINI Reason. Play. Égalité.
SAGITTARIUS Quality. Heritage. Tribe.

The big, obvious issue here is imperialism vs. anti-imperialism, aristocracy vs. egalite, entitlement vs. commonness, and all the other similar distinctions. There isn't quite a reason vs. faith theme - at least, not as much so as with Virgo-Pisces, or at least a different type. We find something like transient companionship vs. invested tribe. I suppose heritage polarizes against a kind of futurism, though not as pronounced as with Aquarius and Libra.

CANCER Imagination. Emulation. Mystery.
CAPRICORN Independent. Discontent. Wild.

Emulation vs. Independence is a good anchor for this, and many related traits spin off of it, e.g., Cancer brings persuasion, marketing, packaging, enthusing, buying into, while Capricorn is highly resistant to all of that, resistant if not impervious to persuasion, at least uncomfortable using that on others. One is looking for a model or ideal to emulate, the other striking out as itself, without attachment or debt, emphasizing autonomy first. Of course, not evident in these words, there are parent-family themes, both being strongly parent-identified and parent-affected (however it goes from there). The nature of Cancerian imagination is to order and narrow (perhaps overly structure) while that of Capricorn is wild and capricious. One seeks deep contentment, the other thrives in discontent. (Neither is very self-disclosing.)

LEO Centricity. Dignity. Perfection.
AQUARIUS Scientific. Unconventional. Inclusive.

Centricity (distinction of one point from the whole) vs. circumerentiality (embracing all the variants collectively or inclusively): Notice how each intrinsically defines the other. A variant on this is exclusive vs. inclusive (but Leo isn't that exclusive - it's not Sagittarius, e.g., others are always part of the Leo equation at least as much as Aquarius). Dignity vs. unconventional isn't a direct polarity, but the idea is that Leo represents institutions, heritage, even established culture (within which there is innovation) while Aquarius represents the avant-garde, breaking with precedent, overflowing boundaries (yet typically in the context of history and existing forms). Both are perfectionists, but in different ways. I would have to think how to articulate the way Leo is at odds with Aquarius' "scientific" side, because Leo certainly tends to be fact-based, but there is certainly a way in which presentation matters more than pedantry? That needs some work.

In any case, there is a royalty vs. democratic theme here similar to Sagittarius-Gemini, but distinguishable primarily in the way that royalty is distinguishable from aristocracy, i.e., a true king has a different level of duty toward and inclusion of those over him he or she rules.

VIRGO Strategic. Analytical. Innocent.
PISCES Theatrical. Mysterious. Romantic.

Reason vs. Unreasonis the main key, with all sorts of spin-offs. The point of view is atomic and fact-driven (analytical) vs, global and impression-driven (mysterious). I think there is fruit to be harvested in strategic vs. romantic, as two different psychological modes: Perhaps something in understanding that Pisces itself is trust-mistrust on an emotional basis while Virgo is confirm-doubt on a factual basis. Innocent vs. theatrical is a true polarity since "innocence" in the Virgo sense means simplicity - one is closely shaved, the other is embellished.

LIBRA Beauty. Tease. Justice.
ARIES Contrary. Libertarian. Imperial.

Imperial vs. Justice is really a commonality of justice, but polarized as rulership and justice concentrated in a single center (autocracy) vs. justice differentiated to the collective (democracy). Libra draws people together in compromise, attraction, and seduction, while liberty is self indifferent to others (other than as to their function and usability), being intentionally contrary, independent, at odds with. (Libra is "even," Aries is "at odds.")

[Jupiter Sets at Dawn]

Leo wants innovation that comes naturally from what's already there. Change by increment. Backwards compatible. Remodeling.
Aquarius wants innovation that comes from kicking everything down and starting over. Change without consideration of what came before, and immediately! Right now! Tear it down and start over.

Sagittarius, in contrast to Leo, wants to keep the status quo. Leo wants change, because it wants growth. Leo is inclusive, and there must be growth to include everyone. Sagittarius is exclusive.

[Veronica]

Leo wants innovation that comes naturally from what's already there. Change by increment. Backwards compatible. Remodeling.
Aquarius wants innovation that comes from kicking everything down and starting over. Change without consideration of what came before, and immediately! Right now! Tear it down and start over.

Sagittarius, in contrast to Leo, wants to keep the status quo. Leo wants change, because it wants growth. Leo is inclusive, and there must be growth to include everyone. Sagittarius is exclusive.

It struck me about what you said about Leo and Aquarius and how they are so much like the nothern hemispheres seasons. Leo being the hot summer time full sun and tons of vegetation while Aquarius is the cold dark barren winter. Growth happens in both the light and the dark. I swore up and down for years my kids wear taller in the morning then when I tucked them in at night.